24 ms·
Fastest rate of natural carbon dioxide rise over the last 50k years
- blueflow 3y agoThe comments section is an trash fire. Some people seem to be more than ready for the apocalypse to actually happen. What a sad state of affairs.
- BirAdam 3y agoPeople never picture themselves as being among those great numbers who suffer and die in these scenarios.
- blueflow 3y agoBe realistic, you are more likely to die from cardiovascular issues or car crashes.
- fuzzfactor 3y agoAnd suffer from rising water levels, don't ask me how I know.
- mjhay 3y agoA simultaneous failure of multiple breadbasket regions (something made much more likely by climate change) would case mass global death. To be fair, first-worlders wouldn't be as affected, though. It's not good to assume all hope is lost, but it is also dangerous to bury your head in the sand.
- trashtester 3y agoGlobal food production per capita now is massively higher than 50 years ago (and still climbing). And also probably higher than any time in the past. Even if food production falls globally by 25% or so, any famines will be due to distribution, not lack of global food production. If we really screw up, we may have famines similar to what was relatively common up to about 1980. And why did we stop having them?
- abdullahkhalids 3y agoMany countries in the world can't feed themselves. They import food from others. If there are crop failures, food producing countries impose export bans. For example, India has a ban on wheat export this year [1] because of crop failure. Once export bans become tit-for-tat (not dissimilar to the tit-for-tat export/import control bans between US-China right now), then some countries will be fine, and others will experience mass starvation. Global food production per capita only works if there is free trade of food. [1] https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-61590756 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-61590756
- trashtester 3y agoI live in a country that imports 50% of the food. As long as the population produces something that others will trade for, that tends to work out ok. However, should global food trade suddenly stop, I may be one of those starving. Edit: just to be clear: Global refusal to trade food is extremely rare. What happens a lot more often, is that some country is unable to purchase food abroad due to either some blockade or lack of purchasing capacity.
- EasyMark 3y agodoing my best to cover those too. I try to stay physically fit and eat a diet that is anti-inflammatory
- morkalork 3y agoIt's kinda like learned helplessness and depression have infiltrated the human condition. But why wouldn't it? We're not that dumb, we see what's happening around us. It's mad.
- canadiantim 3y agoa trash fire * Some people just want to watch the world burn
- deemster 3y agoIt is sad but I think it points to how meaningless people find their lives. That's a big issue, why have we created a society where everyone is so miserable they want to watch the world burn.
- moneytide1 3y ago[flagged]
- torstenvl 3y ago[flagged]
- belter 3y agoWe are in the multilayered race between - The risk of the rise of AGI - The risk and madness of Nuclear conflict - The risk of runaway Climate change My money is on Mother Gaia. She will brutally and swiftly discipline her puppies.
- wafriedemann 3y ago[flagged]
- wafriedemann 3y ago[flagged]
- aeonik 3y agoAGI will likely want low noise circuitry, so at least a rogue AI overlord would likely be aligned with the other two objectives. Can't have high intensity radioactive and thermal noise messing with those world dominating algorithms.
- 127 3y agoOr maybe AI will just nuke humans to fix climate change.
- gessha 3y agoAh, good ol Gandhi strats
- dangus 3y agoI feel AGI and nuclear conflict have zero relevance to this article. I also personally think the risk of nuclear conflict is pretty much zero.
- EGreg 3y agoYou’re pretty much alone in that
- 3y ago
- waihtis 3y agoCan we soon start talking about the largest elephant in the room - China and their global junk manufacturing industry - seeing how China commits approximately the same amount of CO2 into the atmosphere as the United States, India, the EU and Russia combined? Global top polluters: China, more than 14 million tons of CO2 United States, 6 million tons of CO2 India, 3.5 million tons of CO2 European Union, 3.4 million tons of CO2 Russia, 2 million tons of CO2
- Rinzler89 3y ago> - China and their global junk manufacturing industry And who orders, buys and pays for all the junk? The western consumers. Who offshored their own dirty manufacturing industry to China due to their lack of workers/human rights and environmental protection? The west. Which companies profited the most from this offshoring to China? The western ones. Same for the textile/clothes industry. So I think you're looking at the wrong elephant. Look at your elected leaders first for failing to regulate "free trade" for the sake of profiteering at the expense of the environment. The hypocrisy of the rich western nations blaming the environmental damage on the poor countries to which they knowingly and willingly offshored their dirty industries to for profit, is mind boggling. Also, the hypocrisy of western tech companies when dealing with China is equally grandiose: -China's CCP: "So US big tech, you will have to host your data here and build backdoors to your services for us so we can read all your customer data and spy on your users here. Take it or leave it." -US big-tech: "Yessir! Right away CCP! Which other way should we bend over to make money in China?" -EU regulators: "So we're gonna need you to be upfront to your users here about your privacy invasive tracking and give users and opt-out option, and also not block your smaller competitors from accessing your gate-kept market places" -US big-tech: "Noooo! That's tyranny! Uncle Sam help, your poor tech monopolies are being oppressed by the Europeans."
- waihtis 3y agoNo I'm with you, the multinational corporations are a major culprit in this.
- 3y ago
- mataslauzadis 3y agoThe title is misleading, the article does not claim the current rise is “natural”, they just compared it to prehistoric records which were natural
- pmayrgundter 3y agoThe title is also misleading in that the paper (https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2319652121 https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2319652121) doesn't claim to determine when the fastest rates of CO2 rise have been. In fact, it starts by saying cores generally can only support analysis of durations >100 years. I take note of this because I've looked at this problem before and agree that core samples have a hard time supporting claims like "most in the previous XXkya" when compared with the last few decades, be it CO2, CH4, avg temp d02, etc. Starting with layers as recent as 30kya, the age of the trapped gas often spans multiple centuries, and so e.g. you'd be averaging out point outgassing from even very large volcanoes well beyond detectability. Beyond 50-60kya, the layer durations are all in the few millennia range. Here's my analysis worksheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1p793c3NZFp2e80ufqyJKBbjWFEzJqTyazyGH8VHPDjA/edit#gid=1546164419 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1p793c3NZFp2e80ufqyJK... Reference data: Antarctic Ice Core 155,000 Year CO2 and Gas Stable Isotope Data - Eggleston, S.; Schmitt, J.; Bereiter, B.; Schneider, R.; Fischer, H. 2016. Evolution of the stable carbon isotope composition of atmospheric CO2 over the last glacial cycle. Paleoceanography, 31. doi: 10.1002/2015PA002874 https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/paleo-search/study/19942 https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/paleo-search/study/19942
- AnimalMuppet 3y agoTwo possible takes on "natural": 1. They may mean "in nature", that is, not inside a building, and not even in a city (both of which would tend to give higher numbers). 2. They may mean "using something in nature as a measuring method" - in this case, Antarctic ice. I agree that it's a confusing/misleading term.
- EasyMark 3y agoHumans are "natural". Many species have overpopulated and overused the resources they need to survive and eventually became extinct, we are extremely natural.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- shmageggy 3y agoPaper link https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2319652121 https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2319652121 Absolutely infuriating that university press releases don't include this. They should be embarrassed.
- Daub 3y agoAgreed. I would understand such oversight from the 'common press', but from a university I would expect better. Oddly, of the 16 authors, they credit the first and the last, yet authors are usually cited in order of importance. The writer of this article clearly did not know better. Perhaps she thought that to credit the first and the last would be somehow 'covering all bases'. As others have done, I also question the title of the article, which does not correspond to the facts presented in the paper. As a press release, this is a mess. Regarding the actual content, I am no expert, but on surface evaluation their methodology seems generally sound. Importantly, they seem to be referencing data from first hand sources. However, I am still confused. They state: > A total of 453 measurements were made from 249 individual depth levels on the WAIS Divide Ice core (79.48°S, 112.11°W). Does that mean '453 measurements from each of the 249 depth levels'? Or '453 measurements from random points in the 249 depth levels'? Or what? And what is the difference between an 'individual depth level' and a 'depth level'. Such imprecision aside, climate change = warming ocean = wind direction change = catastrophic climate change. I remain worried.
- doctoboggan 3y agoThe first author is important as you said, but the last author is almost always the PI or leader of the lab that published the paper. So I guess it’s you that clearly did not know better.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- imglorp 3y agoSource paper: https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2319652121 https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2319652121
- feverzsj 3y agoClimate change is unavoidable. People should start moving to highland now.
- self_awareness 3y agoAnd did you do it?
- asow92 3y agoI did. Northern Appalachian/Allegheny Plateau region. Lots of cheap real estate with low natural disaster risk. Also a great region for small scale agriculture. Climate change might even help this region's arability.
- trashtester 3y agoI actually had sea level rise and radius from likely thermonuclear targets in mind when I bought my house. I hadn't read The Science yet, so I believed The Propaganda. Now that I've read The Science (IPCC reports), it turns out sea levels are unlikely to rise more than 50cm, and definitely not 10+ meters like I was preparing for.
- dylan604 3y ago> radius from likely thermonuclear targets which direction did you take it though? did you move to a place away from likely targets (which really, with as many nukes that are out there, what's not a target?), or did you move closer so that you'd be taken out in the first wave and spared the life of misery after? my dad used to say that one of the deciding factors where he chose to build the house I grew up in was based on the latter.
- trashtester 3y agoI moved away from the most likely target, enough that I would be likely to survive a 400 kt nuke.
- Trow839rn 3y ago> Fastest rate of natural carbon dioxide rise over the last 50k years Natural CO2 rise?
- silverquiet 3y agoYes, I'm not sure what to make of that wording either. Based on my quick read of the article, it should probably just be "rise". Presumably it is knowable from isotope analysis if carbon added to the atmosphere is recent or fossil. We certainly know that we are adding fossil carbon to the atmosphere at a prodigious rate, and if "natural" carbon content is rising as well, then that is quite bad news because it would likely mean we had crossed some tipping point or other where the Earth system itself has begun contributing to carbon emissions.
- Trow839rn 3y agoNo, it is "natural" rise. If earth system itself contributes to carbon emmisions, we need to subtracted that from anthropogenic emmisions! This is great news! Our efforts are actually paying off! Soon we will cut human emmisions to zero! Also we should substract emmisions produced by other species like cows, dogs, cats.. And I have great business idea, where orangutan owns and operates coal plant, that is natural and should be substracted as well!!! Not every CO2 molecule is produced by humans!!!!
- itishappy 3y ago> “Our research identified the fastest rates of past natural CO2 rise ever observed, and the rate occurring today, largely driven by human emissions, is 10 times higher.” They are investigating historical trends. (They are then comparing their findings to modern trends.)
- card_zero 3y agoIf I understand the paper correctly, Southern Hemisphere westerly winds are intensifying due to a natural cycle on the scale of decades. This makes the southern ocean warmer (and the arctic colder, but the ocean is mostly in the south). Warm water doesn't take up so much carbon dioxide. (Water takes up carbon to produce carbonic acid, so if the water is warmer it incidentally reduces ocean acidification, a possible benefit?) Or it might be about convection. > The drivers and source of these centennial-scale CO2 jumps are unknown. The proposed mechanisms include enhanced ocean–atmosphere CO2 exchange in the Southern Ocean (via wind-driven upwelling of carbon-rich deep waters or invigorated convection), surface ocean temperature changes (impacting CO2 solubility), biomass burning (via NH subtropical wildfires), or a combination of mechanisms.
- toss1 3y agoGreat visualization from Randall Munroe: https://xkcd.com/1732/ https://xkcd.com/1732/ Literally everyone should see this. Edit: Evidently many people still do not get the point The point is that yes, climate has changed in the past, and the individual values are not the problem. The PROBLEM is that it has never changed this FAST. By orders of magnitude. Velocity changes everything. Consider just taking a sip of your coffee 1000X as fast as usual. Instead of bringing your cup the 2' from table to lip in 1 sec, it's 1/1000 sec. You will require multiple explosions to accelerate it to 2000fps/609m/sec/Mach2, and back to zero. Same description of events, entirely different process and results. Similar for species and ecosystems to adapt at 1000X the speed they've ever seen.
- blueflow 3y agoAnd before they start panicking, they should see this: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:All_palaeotemps.svg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:All_palaeotemps.svg The XKCD comic starts at the coldest moment in history known to mankind.
- itishappy 3y agoWhat do you take away from this?
- blueflow 3y agoThat its not nearly as much as an catastrophe as some HN readers wish it to be. Think about it. The carbon didn't spawn in the earth, it got deposited there. Coal and oil are sediment based. It used to be in circulation previously. And yet Earth is still habitable.
- lesuorac 3y agoOh geeze, that graph is really concerning. We're approaching temperatures where humans weren't living!
- itissid 3y agoLowest common denominator to solve all these problems is either 1. Invent super cheap and scalable energy solution. Like Fusion. We could pretty much do whatever climate solution we want. 2. MMT to achieve (1) and a combination of one of: a). Viable Climate solutions which are currently "costly" and if necessary UBI so labour and time could be freed up to implement those solutions. b). Massively subsidize nationalized AI industry to crash the cost of implementation of said climate solutions.
- adrianN 3y agoThere is no reason to believe that fusion is cheap.
- baq 3y agoFusion is cheap if you price in externalties of fossil fuels. Nobody does that because it's political and economical suicide... unless everybody does that at the same time. We need a good proper crisis for this.
- adrianN 3y agoLet me be more precise: There is no reason to believe that fusion is cheaper than fission and fission is not competitive with renewables.
- informal007 3y agoI don't know other, But there are more and more extreme weather situation in my city recent years.
- linuxftw 3y ago> “We think they are caused by a dramatic collapse of the North American ice sheet. This sets into motion a chain reaction that involves changes to the tropical monsoons, the Southern hemisphere westerly winds and these large burps of CO2 coming out of the oceans.” Right. CO2 lags temperature increase, it does not drive temperature increase. Unless 'ice sheet collapse' is driven by something other than an increase in temperature (which would be nonsensical to suggest).
- TimPC 3y agoIt actually does both. The increase in CO2 causes temperature increase which is well documented in the literature. But increase in temperature also causes the release of CO2 which further increases the temperature.
- FreeFull 3y agoThe increase of temperature also causes the release of methane, which is a much stronger greenhouse gas than CO2.. Things aren't looking great
- ghthor 3y agoThe global “focusing” on CO2 pollution has just misdirected all activism away from fighting localized environmental pollution by corporations to and intangible hard to fight “pollution”. It’s sad
- linuxftw 3y agoI completely agree. Corporations are destroying our waterways and contaminating the land with forever chemicals, and people won't stop talking about CO2. We're going to have a toxic planet long before we burn to death.
- NotYourLawyer 3y agoIt’s time to stop pretending we aren’t going to do geoengineering and get serious about making it happen.
- kgabis 3y agoI imagine it will happen when heatwaves and droughts start to be a serious issue.
- BirAdam 3y agoNah. Politicians will still have the wrong incentives, and they’ll just let the poor die. Meanwhile the rich will buy up all arable land, and all land not largely affected. Following that, they’ll tighten control of national borders to stop waves of migration.
- zelphirkalt 3y agoUntil all the pitchforks are taken up again.
- frabjoused 3y agoIsn’t the whole issue that the real action will be too late given our currently technology?
- hackerlight 3y agoHeatwaves are a serious issue already, try being one of the few hundred million people in South Asia/SEA with 3k annual income and no aircon during April 2024. School cancelled and outdoors work nearly impossible due to wet bulb temperatures nearing the threshold of human survivability.
- chickenlittle12 3y ago[flagged]
- karol 3y agoGonna warm it up baby so you'll be building new pyramids in no time!
- vouaobrasil 3y agoLet's keep in mind we would not have any CO2 rise if it weren't for science and engineering.
- IncreasePosts 3y agoHow calibrated are our proxy methods for determining CO2? Is there any concern about the accuracy of the proxy methods in the scientific community?
- gmerc 3y agoNo
- Symmetry 3y agoWith each new IPCC report the chances of us keeping global warming below 1.5 C become more and more remote as emissions are locked in. But at the same time the really bad scenarios where we go well over 4 C also become more remote. Every half degree is worse than the last and each is worth righting for but it does look like our civilization will make it through this intact, even if not all people individually.
- GenerWork 3y ago>it does look like our civilization will make it through this intact Has anybody ever seriously believed that we wouldn't make it through? This just seems like an alarmist take to me.
- Symmetry 3y agoIt is an alarmist take but that doesn't meant that people haven't believed it.
- EricE 3y agoIndeed. Fear = control Control = power
- DFHippie 3y agoHere's a paradox. If people assume you are alarmist and discount everything you say -- "Oh, you way we need 100. I assume therefore that we only need 20. Here are 20." -- you need to be alarmist to get them to react appropriately. Then they attribute your exaggeration to your own deficiency, not your reaction to theirs. Anyway, that's a general observation, not a claim that any particular position is alarmist.
- vasco 3y agoThis way of behaving in life is a very "rat each other out" choice from the prisioner's dilemma. Whenever I notice someone plays this game of shifting overton window instead of just stating what they want, specially at work, I can never take them seriously again.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- egberts1 3y agoI look forward to the resurgence of the Amazon Basin with those extra CO2.
- angela-misan 3y ago[dead]
- TheRealNGenius 3y ago[dead]